KnotStronger This is a must-see and one of the best documentaries - and films - of this year.

Bluebell Alcock Ok... Let's be honest. It cannot be the best movie but is quite enjoyable. The movie has the potential to develop a great plot for future movies

Staci Frederick Blistering performances.

Billy Ollie Through painfully honest and emotional moments, the movie becomes irresistibly relatable

JohnHowardReid Producer: Dale Van Every. Copyright 12 April 1940 by Paramount Pictures Inc. (Credit titles give copyright year as 1939). New York opening at the Paramount: 10 April 1940. U.S. release: 12 April 1940. Australian release: 3 April 1941 (sic). 8 reels. 6,906 feet. 77 minutes.SYNOPSIS: "What you are doing is mad. It is diabolical. You are tampering with powers... reserved... to God." — Paul Fix.COMMENT: A cult classic science fiction piece with Albert Dekker in his most memorable role as the mad scientist. The faultless special effects stand up well (despite their primitive methodology) to today's computer generation. Of course a more sophisticated modern audience will probably find the dialogue and situations pretty risible. They will think themselves superior not only to the film but to the audiences who originally enjoyed it, not realizing that 1940's picture-goers found Dr. Cyclops pretty much of a hoot too. But it's not the dialogue and the direction that matters, nor even the acting. It's the special effects. They're great. And it's all fast-paced with plenty of action and cliffhanger thrills. Imaginative color photography and an atmospheric music score smooth over Schoedsack's inclined-to-be-static camera set-ups. True, this is no King Kong, but Mr. Schoedsack knows his monsters well enough to shoot home another box-office winner here. Oddly, despite this success, it was nine years before he made another film, his last, "Mighty Joe Young".OTHER VIEWS: Known as the most fearless director in the world, Ernest B. Schoedsack tackles neither real nor imaginary wild animals in "Dr. Cyclops" but a monster in human form. In this thinly disguised anti-fascist tract, Schoedsack casts Albert Dekker as an almost blind and eventually one-eyed Hitler whose lust for power over his own universe causes him to use science to destroy rather than create, to maim rather than heal. He ruthlessly annihilates outspoken opposition and regards his now leaderless subject peoples as playthings and toys, and finally as enemies that must be destroyed. Dekker's impression in the title role has given him such lasting fame, we tend to overlook the good work contributed by the rest of the players, particularly Charles Halton in one of his biggest and most successful roles as the will-not-be-bullied Bulfinch. Heroine Janice Logan (this is the last of the only three films I have for her) is an attractive lass, and we enjoyed Thomas Coley (this seems to be his only movie appearance) as the reluctant hero.The film has been realized on an enormous budget with marvelous effects and technical wizardry. The duplicate sets — one normal- sized, the other gigantic-sized — are all perfectly matched. The process work is impeccable. — JHR writing as George Addison.

dougdoepke Two scientists and a crew are summoned to a jungle laboratory where a weird scientist measures people with a ruler.Poor Cyclops, he's more of a bumbler than a mastermind. But then his eyesight must be around 1000-1000. Actually, actor Dekker pretty much low-keys the role, considering how malevolent he can be, e.g. Kiss Me Deadly (1955), Among the Living (1940). Here his Cyclops is in the middle of the jungle with all this sophisticated equipment and coke bottle eyeglasses. Just what is he trying to do with his special 'shrink-em down to edible size' formula. I must have missed his Grand Plan, unless it was to feed his hungry cat on the cheap. Anyhow, the little people don't have to do much acting, just a lot of scampering while Cyclops makes a mess of the furniture.What's really arresting is not so much the storyline, but rather the special effects. I expect Paramount popped a bundle putting together some of the little people sets. Anyhow, maybe I'm as blind as Cyclops, but I couldn't spot any trick photography, which makes the whole weird thing seem more believable. Then too, there's all that talk about radium, uranium and pitchblende, all several years before the big brains turned that stuff into an A-bomb. Maybe that was his Grand Plan, after all. Actually, I thought the movie was more fun than scary, sort of like a Hollywood version of Blind Man's Bluff.

MartianOctocretr5 Great fodder for late night horror hosts. A mad scientist is on the loose, performing miniaturizing experiments deep in the jungles of Peru. Some fellow scientists are invited to assist him in his mysterious work, and it's pretty obvious what's going to happen to them. This is one of the earlier science fiction movies, and the "special effects" are certainly primitive by today's standards, but it's a highly re-watchable movie for its novelty value, sparked mostly by a deliciously psycho-sinister characterization by Albert Dekker in the title role. He starts out a paranoid weirdo, jealously guarding his research, and gets more and more bizarre and homicidal as the story progresses.For its time, the giant sets/forced perspective were probably the main draw of the movie, but the maniacal rants and actions of Dr. Thorkell were what I liked best. After making his rejected guests his first human subjects of the "condenser," it becomes a cat-and-mouse game as the sight-impaired Thorkell decides to exterminate his "little friends." Lines such as "I will find you, and when I find you, I will destroy you!" are frequent.The story doesn't grow too much beyond that point, but the action scenes are nonetheless still interesting to watch. Worth a look if you can find a copy.

MARIO GAUCI I had watched this as a kid on a now-defunct Sicilian TV channel, but it seems to have vanished off the face of the Earth in the interim – that is, until the recent DVD release from Universal as part of their second "Sci-Fi Collection". The film was yet another infrequent genre entry from Paramount – after 1931's DR. JEKYLL AND MR. HYDE and the trio from 1933 ISLAND OF LOST SOULS, MURDERS IN THE ZOO and SUPERNATURAL; interestingly, it was a Technicolor production – the first to be shot in this process after Warners' two earlier experiments DOCTOR X (1932) and MYSTERY OF THE WAX MUSEUM (1933). Plot-wise, DR. CYCLOPS was a variation on the "shrinking" theme explored in MGM's THE DEVIL-DOLL (1936) – which proved quite popular over the years, as can be attested by the likes of THE INCREDIBLE SHRINKING MAN (1957), ATTACK OF THE PUPPET PEOPLE (1958), CURSE OF THE DOLL PEOPLE (1961), etc. The titular character – for which underrated character actor Albert Dekker is probably best-remembered and his most notable genre contribution alongside the dual role in AMONG THE LIVING (1941) – would, of course, fit in with the era's virtually interminable parade of mad scientists; though, typically, he means well by his experiments, his approach to science (and his fellow man) is utterly ruthless. Working in seclusion but deterred by his failing sight, he invites three eminent colleagues to confirm his findings without actually divulging the nature of his experiments; when they begin to get curious and decide to stick around, he does not shrink {sic} at the prospect of using them for guinea pigs! Soon enough, they are fighting for their lives – and not just from the wily doctor, as everyday objects become inaccessible (a door-knob) or otherwise take menacing proportions (a cat)!; on the other hand, they take advantage both of their current dimension (hiding in places where Dekker cannot get at them) and the doctor's own physical drawback (breaking the spare sets of lenses, kept handy in a drawer, while he is sleeping). Interestingly, the shrinking process eventually halts and the subjects start reverting to normal size – which is how the heroes, having gotten rid of "Cyclops" in the very well where he stores his all-important ray-gun, are able to return to civilization after several months of 'convalescence'. The handsome-looking film, an entertaining and efficient 76 minutes, makes for a worthy addition to director Schoedsack's genre resume' (which includes seminal titles like THE MOST DANGEROUS GAME {1932} and KING KONG {1933}, notable ones like SHE {1935} and MIGHTY JOE YOUNG {1949}, not to mention the lesser but endearing SON OF KONG {1933}).